@BabyEater9000 do it the "norway way": We vote for our prime minister. He becomes the prime minister. We vote for a new mayor every fourth year, he becomes mayor. Democracy for the win!
@BaronBuddy Do the brazilian way! Everybody +18 MUST vote, even if a person doesn't want to. Each person has the right of 1 vote and, in every city (even the smallest one), we use the voting machine. After the voting day, all votes are counted and the cadidate who was most voted wins the election. Because the elections are totally computerized, we know our new president just a few hours after this process.
This is how it works each candidate gives money to the electors and the candidate that gives the most wins. Because you can afford to bribe a an electoral collage but not all the people of the USA.
Seems to be a serious problem with this. Candidate A could win in just over half the states by a small margin, but Candidate B won in the minority states by a landslide.
Technically Candidate B got more votes nation-wide, but lost the election.
I guess there are worse systems in place right now on the planet. And I might be overlooking something so simple its in plain sight, but how can this make more sense than just tallying votes by the individual person?
Could you please clarify some questions for me? If, for example, Kansas has four congressional districts; and in three of them people elect X, but in the remaining one people elect Y; does that mean that statewise, Kansas will be voting for X, providing 4+2 electors for candidate X? But doesn't that mean that one fourth of the population's voice goes unheard? And when we talk about "electoral college", does the phrase refer to the whole electoral system perhaps to something else?
@Numbuh7 we have looked, and maybe you should do the same. you're free to disagree but you shame yourself as a fool by calling others sheeple when we have very good reasons for following him and well.... the constitution!!
@sereneyoshiko I have no problem with the ones that are genuinely choosing to stop the senseless killings overseas over the livelihoods of the people here in the USA. But most (and no that's not an exaggeration) Paul followers completely IGNORE the facts and say there's nothing glaringly wrong with his policy and every time anyone says different, they flip a shit. THAT is who I'm talking about and they ARE sheeple. The very epitome of such.
@Numbuh7 I don't think so. I think people who are aware of the corruption in our own gov't and call for audit or end the fed, are definitely a leg up above the true sheeple. I don't think most people are misinformed or blindly for him - but they believe something different, and perhaps they don't trust the source of such facts. which ones - I cant know since they are left unstated. But I cant only speak for myself. He's the only honest guy up there.
I love watching the Circus of US Elections.No one knows what they are doing or voting for.Not one single solid "promise" from any of the candidates.Corporations and Money Lords support both candidates (50/50).
At the end some poor as country gets raped anyway.
When Bush vs Gore happened, Gore won the popular vote, however Bush won elector votes. If there are 538 total electors, and Bush got 271, Gore got 270 that's 541, I'm confused
@JJbones88 it doesnt need to add up to 538, it just has to add up to more than half. I have always thought the system was terrible though, it ought to be simply, majority vote. if we want to talk about how the US is a democracy all the time, which Im not fond of but whatever, its what most people love to say, even though its suppose to be a republic. Anyway democracy is mob rule, or majority rule, and so let the people choose, majority not state.
@cataha The US has an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants (thats all of them, not just mexican ones), how the hell can more then 18 million people in California be illegal mexican migrants if there are not even 18 million illegal mirgants? Answer, you pulled your math out of your ass.
@dave19941000 i just wrote nice statistics for you but then before hitting enter i seat and thought and thought about it. then rewrote everything.!
I understand that you are as many other ones outthere are bunch of washed-up with mass media(TV) etc...... therefore it's not the time " YET " for you to see the real truth,
The only important thing you forgot to mention was that electors don't necessarily have to vote the way their state has voted so you sometimes have problems of rouge "faithless electors" voting for whom they please. I don't have much of a problem with the system of voting since we are a federal republic composed of states but I do think that the votes of the people of these states should be binding and not some kind of "suggested way of voting" for electors.
That's not always how it goes, sometimes the candiate will win the popular vote but lose the Electorial vote. This has happened in 1876 and 1888. My US History teacher also said once in the 1930s Mickey Mouse won the popular vote. lol
And that is why republican govenors are hell bent on passing voter suppresion laws in there state.Just like florida's 2000 voter suppression that saw the appointment (he was appointed president by the supreme court, not elected)of george w. bush. (and look how well that went)
When you vote in a presidential election,does a candidate's character affect or not you vote him?
I'm not interested in their private lives.I think we should focus on policy issues rather character isues.
I mean,adultery or a nasty temper shouldn't necessarily reflect poorly on their ability to do the job.In other words,every person has their positives and negatives.
The core political value of America is republicanism; citizens have a civic duty to aid the state and resist corruption, especially monarchism and aristocracy
“A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.”
Thank you, I'm glad I'm finally cleared up on that! Very well made and informative, but could someone please explain why does it not include Nebraska and Maine???
You didn't even touch on the influence of big corporations and their campaign contributions. Our elections have becoem a farce. A ritual we participate in to convince ourselves we are still in control. We are not. The only things we still decide are the things the ultra-wealthy don't care about, like gay marriage and abortion. If you'll notice both parties are in lockstep when it comes to foreign policy, economics, military spending, etc.That's because those are the issues the rich care about.
I like the electoral college. It allows for the candidate to address the needs of more states and at the same time protecting the presidential mandate. In contrast, the popular vote introduces spoilers. It also does not address the needs of the nation as a whole; just wherever most of the people are. Don't be fooled by "one person, one vote".
@jose123001 It also forces candidates to focus on intrastate issues and overall it gives more influence to smaller states. Its never going to be abolished, it would take 3/4 of the senate to amend it which wont happen since smaller states benefit from it and in the senate each state has the same influence regardless of population/size.
Can anybody tell me, why the smaller states are more advantaged in case of democrazy. I don't know if that make sense, but i need to answer this for a presentation..
The biggest issue I've found during voting in the US is the amount of gerrymandering that occurs. The party in the state with the most authority will alter the districts in ways to make sure the other party's strongest districts are broken and has a stronger representation of the party in power. It means the representation of the state is significantly altered in one party's favor.
So you can win a Minority of the states but still become president because they have more electors?!?! Thats messed up. Although, its still better than here in the UK where you have no chance of being Prime Minister unless youre a member of a registered party, it is quite literally impossible to become Prime Minister as an Independent because you can only be voted into one seat, no more, its entirely unfair on the general population!
@LyricalLies14 Nebraska and Maine actually allow for Electoral votes to be apportioned by Congressional district rather than just the at large winner taking all of the Electoral votes. It's rare that it ever happens that a congressional district doesn't follow the state large...hasn't happened anytime recently if it ever has.
@Observer2The I want to say it has happened recently, in Nebraska. This is a much more effective system, as your vote technically counts twice.
I'm not a fan of the states that want to put in laws that their state's electors go to the winner of the NATIONAL popular vote, but it's their right, and I would move out of a state that does it.
This video is BS, the electoral votes do not represent the popular vote. It's a rigged system. Who are the Electoral College? They're real people who are they and why do they hide in the shadows? That's the question that is never asked.
Good afternoon. I am doing research on what people think about democracy in the U.S.. I did a poll on the site xpolls. Be kind, please click here and express your opinion (spaces must be removed) h t t p://w w w.xpolls.ru/index.php?option=com_votes&controller=vote&id=179. Thank you.
As a proud American I will admit that this system is bumble fucking stupid and antiquated. Most people here don't understand the system and those that do are in favor of a Constitutional Amendment getting rid of the electoral college.
US electoral college voting system is flawed & so is our Australian electoral voting system,both nations have had leaders elected at federal elections even though they did not get the most votes amongst the voting population, If Australia becomes a republic and changes its system I would not want a US model of voting, our systems are not perfect but we do have the ability of free speech to criticise our systems & i'd rather live in Oz or the USA than Nth Korea,Syria,China or Iran & be grateful.
Here is another consideration (in addition to the one below): perhaps the electoral college districts should be maintained, but no "elector" elected - the vote for each district would automatically be assigned to whichever candidate wins the majority in each district. That way, the constituency would not have to worry about a "faithless elector", and CA, TX, NY, and FL wouldn't rule the country. This would make the process more democratic, and possibly open the door for a third party candidate.
Good explanation, but something must be done about "pledged electors" - those pledged to a particular party. This basically annihilates any chance of a third party candidate being elected. Some states require that a member of the electoral college vote according to the majority in their district; I believe this should be a federal law. As it is, members of the electoral college can basically vote as they please - re: "faithless" electors, pledged to a party, who go against their party.
been terminated decades ago. Our population is too big and has changed. For those who disagree. Tough shit. Times change so learn to change with the times or you will be left behind. Yeah yeah I know. What about the smaller states? Who gives a fuck. I say to those citizens. Move to a more populated state. No ones stopping you.I believe there are 5 more states on board. I have to research that again.
Hawaii (3).... Illinois (20).... Massachusetts * (11)....Maryland (10).... New Jersey (14)....Washington (12).... California * (55).... Colorado * (9)....Rhode Island * (4)....Vermont * (3)....New York (29)....Do you know what this is? These states, and it's about fuckin time. Just passed laws that the one running for President, wins by POPULAR VOTE. The ones showing * mark are pending. But they to will pass. Other states are soon to follow. Good because the Electoral College should have........
But the winner-takes-it-all rule doesn't apply for all states as far as i know, so if a party gets the majority of electoral votes in a state it doesn't mean it gets all of the votes.
I don't understand US political system. The president is elected in Israel by Israeli's, US citizens vote for politicians Israel allows. How this works for US?
@icky8vicky It is actually the best system. If the electoral college was to be abolished, smaller states, such as Iowa, Kansas etc...wouldn't have a say, because larger states such as California, New York etc...would drown out the voices of those states. There would be no need to campaign in or listen to the concerns of a state with say 3 million people when you can just win a larger state. the winner of the popular vote and electoral college has been the same with the exception of 3 times
So basically the USA has less democratic choices than countries like Brazil? Seriously? Shame on you. Is it so freaking hard to make each vote count and boom you win? It's like a guy can win just by having most votes on the bigger states but has less votes on total... this is ridiculous. It's not democratic at all... Brazil is like this: You vote, they count all votes, boom, president choosen. END! No one complains, because they voted against or for the choosen one.
@Pedrinluigi You realize though, the popular vote still gets taken into account, right? Generally throughout U.S. history though, with Presidents the popular vote has supported the winning president. People are always going to complain in a representative democracy, or in any government for that matter. It is democratic, its the same idea as electing a senator or representative in the house to support your state, only this time you're voting for the President.
@Pedrinluigi you don't know the US system, you just know the election of the president. with elections of senators, the house of representative, etc... the system of "check and balances" etc, at the end it is balanced. By the wayt, don't talk about democracy when you don't know what it means
@Pedrinluigi the United States of America is not now, nor has it ever been a democracy! It is by design a Republic. The Electoral College, while not perfect, is designed to be a check by the smaller states on the power and influence of the larger states. If we were to go to a system of straight popular vote, smaller states like Kansas would matter even less. The candidates would only need to visit the large population centers, namely New York City, Chicago, and LA to win.
@Pedrinluigi They wouldn't even need to campaign in the rural area of those states, just the urban. In other words, the President of the United States could be elected by those three cities alone! At least this way us in the smaller states have a voice, a check, and an influence on who's elected.
@iliyang Yes, I could, but I think @girty367, @Dogmeat1950, and @thrasher1113 have already said all that I need to. I'll only add this, would you, living in the middle of a rural Midwestern state, like Iowa where I live, really want someone who lives in a major city half way across the US being the only one electing your nation's leader? Put yourself in the middle of a rural state, do you think you have the same mindset as someone from LA? Would you then want them to be the ones electing for U?
@Cory77Adams Of course I wouldn't. But I think that everyone's vote should have the exact same weight towards the decision. Only the popular vote guarantees that. With the current system, one person's vote in a larger state has lower weight than the vote of a person from a smaller state. Now why would you think this is fair? People in larger states are less equal than people from smaller states? The whole world uses the popular vote system, as it gives an equal weight to everybody.
@iliyang Do you also propose eliminating the U.S. Senate and House districts as well? That's essentially the same thing as doing what you propose doing with the Presidency to make everyone's "vote have the same weight" and to be "fair". You are combining completely separate and distinct elections that have nothing to do with one another to create a mythical comparative "weight" of their individual votes.
@iliyang "The whole world uses the popular vote system, as it gives an equal weight to everybody." No they do not. No even close. Many countries have a parlimentary system where the chief executive is chosen by majority party of the legislature and the chief executive is also member of the legislature.
@SniperViper1000 the Netherlands Sweden Norway Switzerland Iceland and Denmark are all country's with a fully democratic system (with more than 2 big party's) these lands are all in the top 10 of the richest country's AND the top 10 of most democratic country's AND the top 10 of country's with the least corruption
@sam15bo true, but sweden, norway, switzerland, iceland, denmark are small countries with a more homogenous population. would a fully democratic system with more than 2 big parties work in a big, diverse country?
@Pedrinluigi The US presidency was not envisoned as a democratic system. The founders wanted a man above faction and party. The electoral college was supposed to be a forum where delegates discussed and chose the best man to lead the nation. Unfortunately democracy prevailed and the delegates become vassals for the will fo the people. The US system actually makes big states less important as a small state has a minimum of 3 EC votes where in proportional systems it would be meaningless.
@Pedrinluigi democacies are one of the worst forms of goverment. our founding fathers called it mobocracy. were 51% of the population has all the rights and 49% dont. a constitutional republic is the best form.
@Pedrinluigi You don't seem to understand basic civics, so "shame on you". The United States is not a democracy, it is a constitutional, representative REPUBLIC. The term "United States" is not singular the same as "Brazil" - it is the united STATES. Each state has its own citizenzry and level of sovereign government. Electing a president is not a national election, but 50 separate state elections (plus DC). The President of the United States is elected by the States he is President of.
@Pedrinluigi The individual state legislatures all voted to allow the citizens of their states vote democratically to choose how their Electors will vote. That is a right granted to the people by their individual States and is a State law. You have to remember - States and their governments existed before the Federal government. The States created the Federal government, not the other way around, and the States could abolish the Federal government if they so chose to meet and do so.
@Pedrinluigi The individual state legislatures all voted to allow the citizens of their states vote democratically to choose how their Electors will vote. That is a right granted to the people by their individual States and is a State law. You have to remember - States and their governments existed before the Federal government. The States created the Federal government, not the other way around, and the States could abolish the Federal government if they so chose to meet and do so.
@thezebrasarecool "Maine and Nebraska do not use this method, opting instead to give two electoral votes to the statewide winner and one electoral vote to the winner of each Congressional district." Kinda makes sense to me.
@Metamorphisize Because of the way US politics works, there will be 2 major candidates for president (a democrat and a republican). Third part candidates usually have zero chance of getting a good number of votes. This means all the electoral votes will be won by one of the two candidates, so one of them will get the majority, unless they tie (269 each), in which case the House of Representatives would choose the winner.
it looks like they will. They are going to get rid of the electoral college. I honestly don't like either parties anymore. But, after comparing the notes. Conservatives supports the rich and wealthy far tooo much than Liberals and people are plain tired of it.
@WilliamHCarney Conservative's don't necessarily "support" the rich, they believe they should be able to be rich. You should be able to keep your money if you want to and be able to do whatever you want, as long as it abides by the constitution, to get rich.
@Metzen09 Arrogance is a trait you should put behind you so no one pokes at your soft skin and couch ass. What do you mean "you Americans?" I'm one citizen of the United States of America and my comment represents 350 million people? Is South America included? Get over yourself.
@laxwolf So yeah they are "SUPPORTING" the rich, if they are working in the interest of the rich they are supporting them and their concerns, i didnt say they were making them rich but if the rich dont want to give away their money and a party says they agree and want to help them that is still support.
@Metzen09 No, I'm saying they try not to interfere which isn't supporting. It should be the persons god damn choice where their money goes. They don't agree on anything, conservative principles and deep constitutional principles say you keep the fruit of your labor. Liberals and Democrats want to take money, conservatives don't interfere.
Fuck this. Electoral college was established over 100 years ago. Times have changed. WE DO NOT HAVE A FAIR VOTING DEMOCRACY. Until the 12th Amendment is abolishied, presidential voting will always be unfair. Just like Canada. We need a popular vote period. If that were the case. Our country would not be soo hated by others (we would not have been in Iraq) because Al Gore clearly won the 200 Election. A blind man could see that. From what I hear. If the Dems retake control which..................
Why don't Maine and Nebraska participate in the election process?
pedrohissa3 1 day ago
it sounds like some complex legal fraud. shouldn't elections be a lot simpler process?
BabyEater9000 4 days ago
@BabyEater9000 do it the "norway way": We vote for our prime minister. He becomes the prime minister. We vote for a new mayor every fourth year, he becomes mayor. Democracy for the win!
BaronBuddy 2 days ago
Comment removed
pedrohissa3 1 day ago
@pedrohissa3 hmm... i wish i could respondon your epic comment but too bad, it seems to be gone :-/
BaronBuddy 1 day ago
@BaronBuddy Dude, you misunderstood me. I'm not criticizing your way of voting. I was just telling you our way to select our president.
pedrohissa3 22 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BaronBuddy Do the brazilian way! Everybody +18 MUST vote, even if a person doesn't want to. Each person has the right of 1 vote and, in every city (even the smallest one), we use the voting machine. After the voting day, all votes are counted and the cadidate who was most voted wins the election. Because the elections are totally computerized, we know our new president just a few hours after this process.
pedrohissa3 1 day ago
Look down to comment "VOTE RON PAUL 2012!" look right ad "Ron Paul 2012?" Vote here now" ,lol XD
killertu 4 days ago in playlist More videos from leelefever
This is how it works each candidate gives money to the electors and the candidate that gives the most wins. Because you can afford to bribe a an electoral collage but not all the people of the USA.
RobinCoultas 5 days ago
do away with the electoral college .. it makes my vote NOT count.
rebeccamesslna 6 days ago
Seems to be a serious problem with this. Candidate A could win in just over half the states by a small margin, but Candidate B won in the minority states by a landslide.
Technically Candidate B got more votes nation-wide, but lost the election.
supertrinko 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
--ANAGRAMS--
Newton Gingrich - The Grinning Cow
Rick Santorum - Must Rock Iran
Willard 'Mitt' Romney - Little War Myrmidon
*Ron Paul - Our Plan*
pinkzeppelin1982 1 week ago
well, it is easy enough to understand, i just don't think they've got the right tactics and the right people to vote for :/
BaronBuddy 1 week ago
I guess there are worse systems in place right now on the planet. And I might be overlooking something so simple its in plain sight, but how can this make more sense than just tallying votes by the individual person?
darksideofearth1 1 week ago
@darksideofearth1 it doesnt, this how bush stoled the election back in 04
smoky281 1 week ago
The American voiting system is crazy hard.. I'm glad I'm norwegian... It's a biiit easier.
Atlantianis 1 week ago
If RP doesn't win, I'm moving to a new country.
JosephMcCantry 1 week ago
Could you please clarify some questions for me? If, for example, Kansas has four congressional districts; and in three of them people elect X, but in the remaining one people elect Y; does that mean that statewise, Kansas will be voting for X, providing 4+2 electors for candidate X? But doesn't that mean that one fourth of the population's voice goes unheard? And when we talk about "electoral college", does the phrase refer to the whole electoral system perhaps to something else?
rojtosorr 1 week ago
The reason i dont know these things is because I'm not American.... but it would help a great deal if somebody could help!
.. I'm happy to provide information about the Hungarian electoral system. :P :D
rojtosorr 1 week ago
FREDRIK = MOSS
Kawaroc 1 week ago
how much does it cost to buy an electoral vote?
MrTheBeast 1 week ago
One things for sure whoever is the next American President, the US people will still get the shaft from these servants of the man!
1965CAPTKIRK 2 weeks ago
AL QAEDDA FOR 2012 AMERICA
sourabhsh111 3 weeks ago
Fucking Ron Paul sheeple... Look at his policies. He will RUIN you.
Numbuh7 3 weeks ago
@Numbuh7 we have looked, and maybe you should do the same. you're free to disagree but you shame yourself as a fool by calling others sheeple when we have very good reasons for following him and well.... the constitution!!
sereneyoshiko 2 weeks ago
@sereneyoshiko I have no problem with the ones that are genuinely choosing to stop the senseless killings overseas over the livelihoods of the people here in the USA. But most (and no that's not an exaggeration) Paul followers completely IGNORE the facts and say there's nothing glaringly wrong with his policy and every time anyone says different, they flip a shit. THAT is who I'm talking about and they ARE sheeple. The very epitome of such.
Numbuh7 2 weeks ago
@Numbuh7 I don't think so. I think people who are aware of the corruption in our own gov't and call for audit or end the fed, are definitely a leg up above the true sheeple. I don't think most people are misinformed or blindly for him - but they believe something different, and perhaps they don't trust the source of such facts. which ones - I cant know since they are left unstated. But I cant only speak for myself. He's the only honest guy up there.
sereneyoshiko 2 weeks ago
RON PAUL 2012
ghilliemann 3 weeks ago
I love watching the Circus of US Elections.No one knows what they are doing or voting for.Not one single solid "promise" from any of the candidates.Corporations and Money Lords support both candidates (50/50).
At the end some poor as country gets raped anyway.
DefectedHuman 3 weeks ago
When Bush vs Gore happened, Gore won the popular vote, however Bush won elector votes. If there are 538 total electors, and Bush got 271, Gore got 270 that's 541, I'm confused
JJbones88 1 month ago
@JJbones88 Bush got 271 and gore got 266. And one electoral vote abstained from the tally. idk why they did but they did
teddsman 3 weeks ago
@JJbones88 it doesnt need to add up to 538, it just has to add up to more than half. I have always thought the system was terrible though, it ought to be simply, majority vote. if we want to talk about how the US is a democracy all the time, which Im not fond of but whatever, its what most people love to say, even though its suppose to be a republic. Anyway democracy is mob rule, or majority rule, and so let the people choose, majority not state.
sereneyoshiko 2 weeks ago
Watch TV. Vote for whoever the TV tells you to vote for.
rji 1 month ago
DARN!!!!!! my state wanted circle!!!!!!
i liked that guy...
v7t2 1 month ago
California has 36mil and more then half of it are illegal Mexicans
Do the math
cataha 1 month ago
@cataha The US has an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants (thats all of them, not just mexican ones), how the hell can more then 18 million people in California be illegal mexican migrants if there are not even 18 million illegal mirgants? Answer, you pulled your math out of your ass.
dave19941000 3 weeks ago
@dave19941000 i just wrote nice statistics for you but then before hitting enter i seat and thought and thought about it. then rewrote everything.!
I understand that you are as many other ones outthere are bunch of washed-up with mass media(TV) etc...... therefore it's not the time " YET " for you to see the real truth,
"Everything has it's place and time "
cataha 3 weeks ago
The only important thing you forgot to mention was that electors don't necessarily have to vote the way their state has voted so you sometimes have problems of rouge "faithless electors" voting for whom they please. I don't have much of a problem with the system of voting since we are a federal republic composed of states but I do think that the votes of the people of these states should be binding and not some kind of "suggested way of voting" for electors.
Y2ANJ 1 month ago
Vote Ron Paul 2012!
thomasjojo1 1 month ago 12
you completely skipped over rigged voting machines and how media totally leaves out candidates sometimes (like they did to Ron Paul last election)
MrAubery 1 month ago
How the hell did the triangle win the election? Any smart person would've voted for the circle. That paper country has a population of idiots!
psychosavant 1 month ago
Vote Ron Paul 2012
lbrownenz 1 month ago 2
I like it but it doesnt distinguish who the electorial vote is
esp123777 1 month ago
That's not always how it goes, sometimes the candiate will win the popular vote but lose the Electorial vote. This has happened in 1876 and 1888. My US History teacher also said once in the 1930s Mickey Mouse won the popular vote. lol
dsquaredproductions 1 month ago
And that is why republican govenors are hell bent on passing voter suppresion laws in there state.Just like florida's 2000 voter suppression that saw the appointment (he was appointed president by the supreme court, not elected)of george w. bush. (and look how well that went)
dsspike51 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
When you vote in a presidential election,does a candidate's character affect or not you vote him?
I'm not interested in their private lives.I think we should focus on policy issues rather character isues.
I mean,adultery or a nasty temper shouldn't necessarily reflect poorly on their ability to do the job.In other words,every person has their positives and negatives.
smartmd90 1 month ago
Comment removed
smartmd90 1 month ago
Mr.S students were here
rubiks15 2 months ago
House of representatives is how states are represented by population. Full Democracy is mob rules!! Fuck that!
assman255 2 months ago
The core political value of America is republicanism; citizens have a civic duty to aid the state and resist corruption, especially monarchism and aristocracy
“A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.”
Thomas Jefferson
assman255 2 months ago
How did you know I lived in Indiana? D:
DeathClockWerk 2 months ago
Thank you, I'm glad I'm finally cleared up on that! Very well made and informative, but could someone please explain why does it not include Nebraska and Maine???
rockymountainrandom 2 months ago
This was helpful. I'm not from America and although the complicated bit began to hurt my head, it was very informative. Thank you
The1AndOnlyMike 2 months ago
You didn't even touch on the influence of big corporations and their campaign contributions. Our elections have becoem a farce. A ritual we participate in to convince ourselves we are still in control. We are not. The only things we still decide are the things the ultra-wealthy don't care about, like gay marriage and abortion. If you'll notice both parties are in lockstep when it comes to foreign policy, economics, military spending, etc.That's because those are the issues the rich care about.
jwallbanger 2 months ago
this was a very helpful video! nicely done
TakeTheStares 2 months ago
But we need to trust somebody anyways
localizarip 2 months ago
I like the electoral college. It allows for the candidate to address the needs of more states and at the same time protecting the presidential mandate. In contrast, the popular vote introduces spoilers. It also does not address the needs of the nation as a whole; just wherever most of the people are. Don't be fooled by "one person, one vote".
archfruit 2 months ago
why not nebraska and maine
drox10000 2 months ago
@drox10000 woah hey drewb it's luken im watching this for history class too
Ryzo425 2 months ago
so complicated
rcmontecalvo 2 months ago
I'm glad he represented the presidents with shapes. ....... If he used names, there'd be a HUUUUGE comment war. Lol.
aabceacba 2 months ago
That is why usa has no right to lecture about democracy to the rest of the world, bush jr 47.9% al gore 48.4% winner bush jr,that makes sense???
folladordeprostis 3 months ago
Neo-cons don't want to eliminate electoral college,because they said that would be "socialism"
folladordeprostis 3 months ago
Thank you, I found it very confusing until this video.
The85Comedian 3 months ago
thank you!
156peacelove 3 months ago in playlist Liked
the electoral college should be abolished
jose123001 3 months ago 45
@jose123001 No it shouldn't, it was put in place for a reason; to make sure candidates that resort to demagoguing and lies don't win elections.
3GBlog 3 months ago
@jose123001 It also forces candidates to focus on intrastate issues and overall it gives more influence to smaller states. Its never going to be abolished, it would take 3/4 of the senate to amend it which wont happen since smaller states benefit from it and in the senate each state has the same influence regardless of population/size.
3GBlog 3 months ago
@jose123001 yeah but neo-cons love it,they don't want to abolish!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11
folladordeprostis 3 months ago
@jose123001 the process makes presidents account even for smaller states. the process seems ok
lanebatts26 3 months ago
@jose123001 Why? Do you really trust the people with all that power?
mynameisjp123 2 months ago
0:07 "...our vote decides who becomes the president of the 'Uninent States'"
ayycubed 3 months ago
Can anybody tell me, why the smaller states are more advantaged in case of democrazy. I don't know if that make sense, but i need to answer this for a presentation..
scoobydoo2512 4 months ago
Comment removed
asiangirl993 3 months ago
Comment removed
asiangirl993 3 months ago
The biggest issue I've found during voting in the US is the amount of gerrymandering that occurs. The party in the state with the most authority will alter the districts in ways to make sure the other party's strongest districts are broken and has a stronger representation of the party in power. It means the representation of the state is significantly altered in one party's favor.
Rymac91 4 months ago
So you can win a Minority of the states but still become president because they have more electors?!?! Thats messed up. Although, its still better than here in the UK where you have no chance of being Prime Minister unless youre a member of a registered party, it is quite literally impossible to become Prime Minister as an Independent because you can only be voted into one seat, no more, its entirely unfair on the general population!
riffss 4 months ago
Can you tell something about the Primaries also ? They have to select delegates i suppose.
yourtube20061 4 months ago
THANK YOU for explaining us this "complicated" election process...
it helps us foreign students a lot to understand it and to do our english homework well !
appLeekun 4 months ago
this system usually re elects an incumbent president like bush in 04......I hope Obama wins again in 12!!! please GOD RE ELECT OBAMA!!!
GAYPRIDE1985 5 months ago
Bull shit, california heathens gonna burn in this depression, lol
JusufJan 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
VOTE RON PAUL IN ENGLISH!!!
MikeFCox 5 months ago
great video
Tschiihad 5 months ago
your choices are obama, a paul, a rick, a mitt and a newt. roflmao
MoltenMozzarella 5 months ago
Das ist einfach zu verstehen :)
TheHanniball97 5 months ago
So what happens in Nebraska & Maine?
LyricalLies14 5 months ago
@LyricalLies14 Nebraska and Maine actually allow for Electoral votes to be apportioned by Congressional district rather than just the at large winner taking all of the Electoral votes. It's rare that it ever happens that a congressional district doesn't follow the state large...hasn't happened anytime recently if it ever has.
Observer2The 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Observer2The It has only happened once. In 2008 Obama carried the 2nd District of Nebraska, winning one electoral vote.
14940674 4 months ago
@Observer2The I want to say it has happened recently, in Nebraska. This is a much more effective system, as your vote technically counts twice.
I'm not a fan of the states that want to put in laws that their state's electors go to the winner of the NATIONAL popular vote, but it's their right, and I would move out of a state that does it.
bigjames02 3 months ago in playlist bigjames02's favorites
@bigjames02 And it did, in Nebraska, in 2008.
Just an update. :)
bigjames02 3 months ago in playlist bigjames02's favorites
thank you foe finally helping m understand this so i dont look stupid in 2012 :)
Shelby4017 6 months ago
This video (method of presentation) is brilliant! Thank you!
achillesiniraq 6 months ago
This video is BS, the electoral votes do not represent the popular vote. It's a rigged system. Who are the Electoral College? They're real people who are they and why do they hide in the shadows? That's the question that is never asked.
HiawathaMohawk 6 months ago
But I live in Nebraska! D=
MrNDSteinbach 6 months ago
I think all Americans should watch this before voting...
Canine021 6 months ago
I feel bad for the circle...
jussimaartens 6 months ago
@jussimaartens lol :)
MrWhyispiegood 6 months ago
People who say that it should be solely POPULAR VOTE...
need to brush on American history.
If we did that we would just be a normal country.
This is why I would've supported the Confederate States of America if I lived in those time.
Back then states were pretty much their OWN COUNTRY
TheseYeahThese 7 months ago
@TheseYeahThese ye it seems that people forget that there is a s at the end of state in United States..............
FlorentChif 6 months ago
Win these three states, and you've won: California, Texas, New York.
papalolita 7 months ago
@papalolita Good luck winning both California and Texas... :P
MrNDSteinbach 6 months ago
What I don't understand is why the Electoral College is 538, an even number. Surely an odd number would be better, to prevent a tie?
andrewlawrence2209 7 months ago
FUCK THE USA
RedMusicSinging 7 months ago
you know...i just found out what politics mean...you see POLI means many and TICS are blood sucking parasites
jerimiah169 7 months ago
I love how americans die, i love how they're going to die, and I love how they are not the only country on the planet earth!
conman2317 7 months ago
Good afternoon. I am doing research on what people think about democracy in the U.S.. I did a poll on the site xpolls. Be kind, please click here and express your opinion (spaces must be removed) h t t p://w w w.xpolls.ru/index.php?option=com_votes&controller=vote&id=179. Thank you.
NaviMurmansk 7 months ago
As a proud American I will admit that this system is bumble fucking stupid and antiquated. Most people here don't understand the system and those that do are in favor of a Constitutional Amendment getting rid of the electoral college.
krankerrrr 7 months ago
We in America should be elect the pres and vp by popular vote
MrWeatherman10 7 months ago
Very interesting, thank you!
ourDC888 7 months ago
thaank you for this videos, have to do presentation about it and it's so complicated >.<
lisachan95 7 months ago
US electoral college voting system is flawed & so is our Australian electoral voting system,both nations have had leaders elected at federal elections even though they did not get the most votes amongst the voting population, If Australia becomes a republic and changes its system I would not want a US model of voting, our systems are not perfect but we do have the ability of free speech to criticise our systems & i'd rather live in Oz or the USA than Nth Korea,Syria,China or Iran & be grateful.
TheHappydazz 7 months ago
Comment removed
TheHappydazz 7 months ago
Comment removed
TheHappydazz 7 months ago
Here is another consideration (in addition to the one below): perhaps the electoral college districts should be maintained, but no "elector" elected - the vote for each district would automatically be assigned to whichever candidate wins the majority in each district. That way, the constituency would not have to worry about a "faithless elector", and CA, TX, NY, and FL wouldn't rule the country. This would make the process more democratic, and possibly open the door for a third party candidate.
n68firebird 7 months ago
Good explanation, but something must be done about "pledged electors" - those pledged to a particular party. This basically annihilates any chance of a third party candidate being elected. Some states require that a member of the electoral college vote according to the majority in their district; I believe this should be a federal law. As it is, members of the electoral college can basically vote as they please - re: "faithless" electors, pledged to a party, who go against their party.
n68firebird 7 months ago
Almost forgot. The numbers represent the Electoral count which totals 170 so far. The running President only needs 270 to win the Presidency.
WilliamHCarney 7 months ago
been terminated decades ago. Our population is too big and has changed. For those who disagree. Tough shit. Times change so learn to change with the times or you will be left behind. Yeah yeah I know. What about the smaller states? Who gives a fuck. I say to those citizens. Move to a more populated state. No ones stopping you.I believe there are 5 more states on board. I have to research that again.
WilliamHCarney 7 months ago
@WilliamHCarney Typical American!
Metzen09 5 months ago
Hawaii (3).... Illinois (20).... Massachusetts * (11)....Maryland (10).... New Jersey (14)....Washington (12).... California * (55).... Colorado * (9)....Rhode Island * (4)....Vermont * (3)....New York (29)....Do you know what this is? These states, and it's about fuckin time. Just passed laws that the one running for President, wins by POPULAR VOTE. The ones showing * mark are pending. But they to will pass. Other states are soon to follow. Good because the Electoral College should have........
WilliamHCarney 7 months ago
But the winner-takes-it-all rule doesn't apply for all states as far as i know, so if a party gets the majority of electoral votes in a state it doesn't mean it gets all of the votes.
waruuum 7 months ago
@waruuum Oh i meant to say popular votes
waruuum 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I don't understand US political system. The president is elected in Israel by Israeli's, US citizens vote for politicians Israel allows. How this works for US?
waiotahi52 7 months ago
Cut out the electors and just count the vote of the people, making voting alot easier. Always hated the electoral voting; it's unfair.
icky8vicky 8 months ago
@icky8vicky It is actually the best system. If the electoral college was to be abolished, smaller states, such as Iowa, Kansas etc...wouldn't have a say, because larger states such as California, New York etc...would drown out the voices of those states. There would be no need to campaign in or listen to the concerns of a state with say 3 million people when you can just win a larger state. the winner of the popular vote and electoral college has been the same with the exception of 3 times
cookseywrko 8 months ago
thanks alot this really helped me out with a presentation i´m working on
pyro80 8 months ago
Triangle and little triangle better not mess up stuff like tetrahedron and little tetrahedron.
solidsnake2730 8 months ago
tats my birth state :)
headgurl2076 8 months ago
jeez!! I'm sure they could make this more complicated if they tried. :D
JohnPersonage 8 months ago
this is not valid in florida at 2000
caio637 8 months ago
So basically the USA has less democratic choices than countries like Brazil? Seriously? Shame on you. Is it so freaking hard to make each vote count and boom you win? It's like a guy can win just by having most votes on the bigger states but has less votes on total... this is ridiculous. It's not democratic at all... Brazil is like this: You vote, they count all votes, boom, president choosen. END! No one complains, because they voted against or for the choosen one.
Pedrinluigi 9 months ago 19
@Pedrinluigi You realize though, the popular vote still gets taken into account, right? Generally throughout U.S. history though, with Presidents the popular vote has supported the winning president. People are always going to complain in a representative democracy, or in any government for that matter. It is democratic, its the same idea as electing a senator or representative in the house to support your state, only this time you're voting for the President.
44pres11 8 months ago
@Pedrinluigi did you not watch the vid?
The USA can't have a Popular vote if it did it would mess up alot of other states who have smaller populations.
Remember the USA is a "REPUBLIC"
The founding Fathers where not dumb, they made it this way for a reason.
Dogmeat1950 8 months ago
@Pedrinluigi they want to protect states' rights, that way the ones with smaller populations have votes that actually count for something
thrasher1113 6 months ago
@Pedrinluigi you don't know the US system, you just know the election of the president. with elections of senators, the house of representative, etc... the system of "check and balances" etc, at the end it is balanced. By the wayt, don't talk about democracy when you don't know what it means
FlorentChif 6 months ago
@Pedrinluigi the United States of America is not now, nor has it ever been a democracy! It is by design a Republic. The Electoral College, while not perfect, is designed to be a check by the smaller states on the power and influence of the larger states. If we were to go to a system of straight popular vote, smaller states like Kansas would matter even less. The candidates would only need to visit the large population centers, namely New York City, Chicago, and LA to win.
Cory77Adams 5 months ago
@Pedrinluigi They wouldn't even need to campaign in the rural area of those states, just the urban. In other words, the President of the United States could be elected by those three cities alone! At least this way us in the smaller states have a voice, a check, and an influence on who's elected.
Cory77Adams 5 months ago
@Pedrinluigi It's not a perfect system, but I'll take it any day over a simple popular vote!
Cory77Adams 5 months ago
@Cory77Adams Can you give a good justification for this?
iliyang 5 months ago
@iliyang Yes, I could, but I think @girty367, @Dogmeat1950, and @thrasher1113 have already said all that I need to. I'll only add this, would you, living in the middle of a rural Midwestern state, like Iowa where I live, really want someone who lives in a major city half way across the US being the only one electing your nation's leader? Put yourself in the middle of a rural state, do you think you have the same mindset as someone from LA? Would you then want them to be the ones electing for U?
Cory77Adams 5 months ago
@Cory77Adams Of course I wouldn't. But I think that everyone's vote should have the exact same weight towards the decision. Only the popular vote guarantees that. With the current system, one person's vote in a larger state has lower weight than the vote of a person from a smaller state. Now why would you think this is fair? People in larger states are less equal than people from smaller states? The whole world uses the popular vote system, as it gives an equal weight to everybody.
iliyang 5 months ago
@iliyang Do you also propose eliminating the U.S. Senate and House districts as well? That's essentially the same thing as doing what you propose doing with the Presidency to make everyone's "vote have the same weight" and to be "fair". You are combining completely separate and distinct elections that have nothing to do with one another to create a mythical comparative "weight" of their individual votes.
Observer2The 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@iliyang "The whole world uses the popular vote system, as it gives an equal weight to everybody." No they do not. No even close. Many countries have a parlimentary system where the chief executive is chosen by majority party of the legislature and the chief executive is also member of the legislature.
Observer2The 4 months ago
@Pedrinluigi Most places have this system because it's efficent.
You're scarificing an itty bity amount of Democracy in order for a more efficent and less corruptable voting system.
Be happy.
SniperViper1000 5 months ago
@SniperViper1000 the Netherlands Sweden Norway Switzerland Iceland and Denmark are all country's with a fully democratic system (with more than 2 big party's) these lands are all in the top 10 of the richest country's AND the top 10 of most democratic country's AND the top 10 of country's with the least corruption
sam15bo 5 months ago 20
Comment removed
MeneerKut 4 months ago
@sam15bo true, but sweden, norway, switzerland, iceland, denmark are small countries with a more homogenous population. would a fully democratic system with more than 2 big parties work in a big, diverse country?
wahoobeans 4 months ago
@sam15bo Suddently I am glad of being a dane
RalleDinesen 2 weeks ago
@Pedrinluigi The US presidency was not envisoned as a democratic system. The founders wanted a man above faction and party. The electoral college was supposed to be a forum where delegates discussed and chose the best man to lead the nation. Unfortunately democracy prevailed and the delegates become vassals for the will fo the people. The US system actually makes big states less important as a small state has a minimum of 3 EC votes where in proportional systems it would be meaningless.
Seaworldexists 5 months ago 2
@Pedrinluigi complete ignorance of US politics right here
oJKBo 4 months ago 3
@Pedrinluigi democacies are one of the worst forms of goverment. our founding fathers called it mobocracy. were 51% of the population has all the rights and 49% dont. a constitutional republic is the best form.
seminoleboy96 4 months ago
@Pedrinluigi You don't seem to understand basic civics, so "shame on you". The United States is not a democracy, it is a constitutional, representative REPUBLIC. The term "United States" is not singular the same as "Brazil" - it is the united STATES. Each state has its own citizenzry and level of sovereign government. Electing a president is not a national election, but 50 separate state elections (plus DC). The President of the United States is elected by the States he is President of.
Observer2The 4 months ago
@Pedrinluigi The individual state legislatures all voted to allow the citizens of their states vote democratically to choose how their Electors will vote. That is a right granted to the people by their individual States and is a State law. You have to remember - States and their governments existed before the Federal government. The States created the Federal government, not the other way around, and the States could abolish the Federal government if they so chose to meet and do so.
Observer2The 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Pedrinluigi The individual state legislatures all voted to allow the citizens of their states vote democratically to choose how their Electors will vote. That is a right granted to the people by their individual States and is a State law. You have to remember - States and their governments existed before the Federal government. The States created the Federal government, not the other way around, and the States could abolish the Federal government if they so chose to meet and do so.
Observer2The 4 months ago
This video was incredibly helpful. Thank you so much. I'll take all the help I can get studying for my finals :P
iTr0ll 9 months ago
Why doesn't Maine or Nebraska select a candidate?
thezebrasarecool 9 months ago
@thezebrasarecool "Maine and Nebraska do not use this method, opting instead to give two electoral votes to the statewide winner and one electoral vote to the winner of each Congressional district." Kinda makes sense to me.
Source: Wikipedia
netsnake24 9 months ago
informative indeed! thanks for sharing!
gariouscom 9 months ago
Okay but who the fuck is going to want a triangle as president?
DRawesomeninjasauce 9 months ago
can someone explain to me what happens if no candidate wins a majority of electors (270+)?
Metamorphisize 9 months ago
@Metamorphisize Because of the way US politics works, there will be 2 major candidates for president (a democrat and a republican). Third part candidates usually have zero chance of getting a good number of votes. This means all the electoral votes will be won by one of the two candidates, so one of them will get the majority, unless they tie (269 each), in which case the House of Representatives would choose the winner.
alex77colts 8 months ago
@Metamorphisize It's impossible to not win the majority...it's an odd number...and there for someone will have at least ONE more than the other....
cookseywrko 8 months ago
it looks like they will. They are going to get rid of the electoral college. I honestly don't like either parties anymore. But, after comparing the notes. Conservatives supports the rich and wealthy far tooo much than Liberals and people are plain tired of it.
WilliamHCarney 9 months ago
@WilliamHCarney Conservative's don't necessarily "support" the rich, they believe they should be able to be rich. You should be able to keep your money if you want to and be able to do whatever you want, as long as it abides by the constitution, to get rich.
laxwolf 9 months ago
@laxwolf So technically they do "support" the rich.
Metzen09 5 months ago
@Metzen09 There's no technicality and quoting support argues with technically making your comment nonsensical.
laxwolf 5 months ago
@laxwolf So they support the rich.
Metzen09 5 months ago
@Metzen09 Read what I said you twat. Flat out no. Conservatives are not making them rich, they are letting them be rich by not liberalizing it.
laxwolf 5 months ago
@laxwolf Why am i a twat.
Metzen09 5 months ago
@laxwolf See this is why you Americans get so much stick cause you are assholes to everybody.
Metzen09 5 months ago
@Metzen09 Arrogance is a trait you should put behind you so no one pokes at your soft skin and couch ass. What do you mean "you Americans?" I'm one citizen of the United States of America and my comment represents 350 million people? Is South America included? Get over yourself.
laxwolf 5 months ago
@laxwolf So yeah they are "SUPPORTING" the rich, if they are working in the interest of the rich they are supporting them and their concerns, i didnt say they were making them rich but if the rich dont want to give away their money and a party says they agree and want to help them that is still support.
Metzen09 5 months ago
@Metzen09 No, I'm saying they try not to interfere which isn't supporting. It should be the persons god damn choice where their money goes. They don't agree on anything, conservative principles and deep constitutional principles say you keep the fruit of your labor. Liberals and Democrats want to take money, conservatives don't interfere.
laxwolf 5 months ago
@laxwolf I'm not disagreeing with you.
Metzen09 5 months ago
@WilliamHCarney Conservatives support electoral colleges,they will sacrifice themselves in order to keep it,sad but true.................
folladordeprostis 3 months ago
Fuck this. Electoral college was established over 100 years ago. Times have changed. WE DO NOT HAVE A FAIR VOTING DEMOCRACY. Until the 12th Amendment is abolishied, presidential voting will always be unfair. Just like Canada. We need a popular vote period. If that were the case. Our country would not be soo hated by others (we would not have been in Iraq) because Al Gore clearly won the 200 Election. A blind man could see that. From what I hear. If the Dems retake control which..................
WilliamHCarney 9 months ago
@WilliamHCarney There was no 200 election.
livvyrella 9 months ago